User talk:Ltarex
Linking to years Please make sure that you're linking to the right article when adding links to years. 1991 is very different from . For production material, use the template. For in-universe stuff, just link directly to the year. Thanks. -- sulfur 16:47, December 5, 2009 (UTC) :Read this sentence above. Carefully. -- sulfur 13:41, December 8, 2009 (UTC) Further year linking stuff Make sure that only Trek related stuff has year links. For example, when talking about a production staff person, only link Trek-relevant years. The years that they worked on X, Y, and Z are irrelevant to MA, but the year that they worked on a Trek TV episode is relevant. -- sulfur 15:11, December 15, 2009 (UTC) Geordi Hologram Hey, I was merging your image you recently uploaded ("File:Geordihologram23662.jpg") with one that already existed at File:La Forge hologram.jpg. Anyway, wikia is having problems and I was wondering if you could upload your file again at the File:La Forge hologram.jpg location? :) Thanks! — Morder (talk) 00:48, January 14, 2010 (UTC) Startrekhistory.com and BG sections When you're using things from that site, can you please actually put a link to the page in question? That way it helps future people know where an item has come from, and it also provides a portal for them to explore further. Thanks. -- sulfur 14:00, April 10, 2010 (UTC) Categories When changing a category on someone, please make absolute certain that you add in the sort key that existed on the previous category. -- sulfur 12:59, May 7, 2010 (UTC) :?? Please explain. After 12 years of English at school, it seems there's still sentences too complex for me to understand. -- Lt. Arex 20:37, May 7, 2010 (CET) You edited the Robert Justman article this morning and changed "Justman, Robert" to "Category:Assistant and second unit directors. The first has a category sort key (as in, it's sorting his category entry by his last name), whereas the addition you made does not have a sort key. -- sulfur 18:49, May 7, 2010 (UTC) Again, when creating articles about real people, pay attention to this. In addition, pay attention to your use of "it's" and "its". "its" is possessive, and "it's" only even means "it is" or "it has". -- sulfur 16:06, July 17, 2010 (UTC) You are forgetting to add the category sort key again on categories. Are you using the automatic category select mechanism perhaps? If so, I would recommend going to your preferences, editing tab, and ensuring that "Disable Category Select" is selected. This will allow you to actually see the code for the categories, which should help remind you to add the sort keys. Thanks. -- sulfur 18:24, February 11, 2011 (UTC) Citations Please make sure you cite notes you add, such as the one about Meyer improvising the line for . Thanks. – Cleanse ( talk | ) 23:26, May 15, 2010 (UTC) :Actually I was thinking on putting the citation to the info (actually it's from the director's audio commentary on the Special Edition DVD), but I rather thought I shall leave it without citing the source, and wonder if one of the admins put a note about it to my talk page, or not. I thought they will, and voilá, I was correct. I wouldn't put a false, unsourced info to MA, but there are many of these from others, so don't bother me, bother them. -- Ltarex 13:03, May 16, 2010 (CET) ::If you see a statement missing a citation feel free to add to it. We don't catch them all but we catch some. If you see someone add an uncited claim feel free to call them on it as well. We're not around 24/7. — Morder (talk) 11:27, May 16, 2010 (UTC) Chase Masterson's birthdate Please see the discussion on the talk page before changing her birthdate again. There is a reason that the article keeps getting reverted. -- sulfur 14:03, July 30, 2010 (UTC) :Sorry, now I see. BUT then why is her birth year on the Star Trek birthdays, 26 February and pages??? You've forgotten to remove it from there... That was where I got the info... -- Ltarex 18:54, July 30, 2010 (CET) Image source? I saw that you've been uploading a bunch of behind the scenes photos from the DVD sets, but I've got a question on File:Filming wolf in the fold.jpg. What's the source for that one? Looks like you accidentally forgot to include it. -- sulfur 11:10, August 9, 2010 (UTC) :Yeah, sorry: http://www.trekcore.com/specials/thumbnails.php?album=72 I try to get most of those images from the DVD sets, to get a valid Paramount source. -- Ltarex 14:02, August 9, 2010 (CET) The idea was for you to add the source (ie, where TrekCore nabbed it from) to the image citation. ;) -- sulfur 12:25, August 9, 2010 (UTC) :Someone (probably a still photographer) took the snapshot in June, 1967 at Desilu Studios, Hollywood, California. Probably that's where TrekCore took the image. Why bother me with things like that? There are COUNTLESS images uploaded by others similar which doesn't have a citation (almost all of the "behind-the-scenes" photos not uploaded by me). And you're not nagging them. You must really hate me for some reason. -- Ltarex 16:48, August 9, 2010 (CET) I nag everyone I can find that uploads an image with no source. Without a source, we cannot verify that Paramount actually owns the image. For example, if it is reproduced from a book, then the actual owner of the image is the book's publisher, who licensed it from the photographer. If you look through all of our images, most of them are actually appropriately cited and licensed. We regularly go through them and try to find as much information as possible, otherwise there is always the threat of having to remove them for legal reasons (as much as we hate to take that route). It might be worth contacting the TrekCore guys asking them where some of those "Specials" images are actually sourced from. -- sulfur 15:12, August 9, 2010 (UTC) Datelinks I see that you're linking to the year properly (as per our conversation above), but when you're linking to a full date, check out the template. For months, use . They are good for the consistency. :) -- sulfur 10:02, October 21, 2010 (UTC) Book citations When adding citations to books in future, can you start adding page nrs too? This is a recent change to the way that we've chosen to cite material. It allows people in the future to find exactly where things are from if they want to get more information. Thanks! -- sulfur 01:34, January 4, 2011 (UTC) Categories (again) As per this discussion, you are still not adding category sort keys. Please take some time to re-read that discussion, and try to do all of the work when adding categories. As it stands, someone has to follow your edits and correct them each and every time. If you still do not understand what you are doing wrong, take the time to ask. Take the time to try things out. Look at the category when you add someone. See where they get sorted in the list. See how other people are sorted. Look at their articles to see how that is done. Seriously. -- sulfur 11:37, February 14, 2011 (UTC) You created an article for Oscar Katz today, and once again, left off a category sort key. Please add these. If you do not understand how to add them, at least respond here, and I can try to explain anew. Also, CBS is a disabmgiuation page. If you mean the channel, then you want to use CBS Television Studios instead. -- sulfur 10:17, April 28, 2011 (UTC) Image categories When uploading images, please don't forget to add on a category. If it's of a member of a species (like your recent Klingons), just add the [[:Category:Memory Alpha images (Klingons)]] category listing on a line below the image license. Thanks, and good finds on the unnamed characters. -- sulfur 17:55, May 25, 2011 (UTC) FYI, you don't need to add the categories for the license or episode. Those two get added automatically by the templates for the episode and license (not in that order though!). Just to save you some typing. :) -- sulfur 14:50, May 26, 2011 (UTC) Crewwoman a word? I posed the question here, but I can see that it might be easily overlooked. I don't think creweomen is a existing word and think that it might be better to refer to the as crew-members or female crew-members. feel free to continue this on the the talk page of the unnamed crew-members -- OvBacon(Talk) 21:08, May 31, 2011 (UTC) "The Practical Joker" citation Thanks for adding the citation to the page about . --Defiant 21:40, June 20, 2011 (UTC) File names Please use a space between words and numbers in file names, as there isn't any reason to mash everything together. - 10:57, June 26, 2011 (UTC) Images from TOS remastered When you use images from remastered episodes of TOS, could you add to them? -- OvBacon(Talk) 20:34, June 27, 2011 (UTC) :Please put the remastered template noted above immediately above the license (after the description), as opposed to putting it a few lines after the category. Thank you. -- sulfur 14:13, June 28, 2011 (UTC) Augments and guards Hi, I've been following your edits on unnamed tantalus colony personnel and ISS Enterprise crewmembers, and I'm wondering if you're suggesting that these two are the same actor? If so, I really must disagree. Likewise for this and this. They are not the same actor. I realise it's pretty hard to talk about characters and actors with no names, so it's possible I've misunderstood whom you've meant. --Myko 18:35, July 1, 2011 (UTC) Cite TOS production timelines Hi, Ltarex. I notice you've been adding to the production timelines of TOS episode articles. Could you please add citations for them, both for the ones you have added and any that you will add? --Defiant 14:09, August 1, 2011 (UTC) :Hi. I used several sources: 1. clapperboard shots, 2. reference books (such as Inside Star Trek: The Real Story), 3. call sheets and schedules, 4. cast and crew recollections and my own questions to a director of the show, and mostly a lot of logic, common sense and a bit of guessing. The first half of the first season is nearly 100% correct, such as the first half of the third season. Second season dates are somewhat less factual and more of mine guessing. And of course there are a lot of episodes I couldn't find or guess their shooting dates. What makes it hard is the fact that many episodes of TOS (althought scheduled to be filmed in 6 days) often went overschedule, resulting in 7 (or even 8) days of filming. It's easier from the second half of season 2 onwards, as the new Paramount regime forced the production staff to finish episodes on time, so there were only a few of them which went overdue. --Ltarex 20:14, August 1, 2011 (CET) Well, please cite whatever source(s) you have used in each specific case. Such as, if you use production sources such as clapperboard shots/call sheets/schedules/interviews with members of the production company, cite where the sources are from (this even includes your own replies from the director you contacted), and page numbers from reference books should also always be cited. One of the aspects that MA notes is if there are any discolorations between official sources, but this task becomes exceedingly difficult if no source is cited. I hope you understand. --Defiant 19:22, August 1, 2011 (UTC) "Inter Arma..." FA Nomination Hello Ltarex! I was hoping you might be able to spare a few minutes to read through and perhaps consider voting for it as an FA? Regardless, any comments you may have on the article would be greatly appreciated. Thank you! :) --| TrekFan Open a channel 19:23, August 26, 2011 (UTC) :Hi! Thank you for asking my opinion. I'll take a look at the page and will likely make my suggestions. -- Ltarex 19:10, August 27, 2011 (CET) Thanks, I appreciate any comments you might have, even if you decide to vote against it. :) --| TrekFan Open a channel 12:51, August 30, 2011 (UTC) New Proposal Hello there. I wish to invite you to contribute and/or vote in this discussion on a new way of electing and retaining admins on Memory Alpha. Should you not wish to vote, your thoughts and opinions on this matter would be greatly appreciated in the "discussion" section. Kind regards, TrekFan. --| TrekFan Open a channel 11:33, September 15, 2011 (UTC) B Tank image You uploaded an image of the B tank, describing it, licensing it (etc), but neglected to mention a source for the image. Where is this image from? -- sulfur 12:48, October 1, 2011 (UTC) :Sorry. Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home (Special Edition) DVD special features. ("Future's Past" documentary featurette). -- Ltarex 14:53, October 1, 2011 (CET) Can you please add the specific information to the image then? Thanks. -- sulfur 13:36, October 1, 2011 (UTC) Matte painting Hey. I thought this link could be interesting for you. The section about Star Trek is at the end of the article. Tom 20:38, October 24, 2011 (UTC) :Thank you, you're most kind. I think Defiant might have like that link too, he used to edit the matte painting article a lot too. -- Ltarex 22:57, October 24, 2011 (CET) Latest edit Hey. I've changed one of your edits and want to tell you why. Dennis Madalone was Morn in "Looking for....". Mark Allen Shepherd did not play Morn as he did not appear in this episode. So Madalone had the part and was not his stunt double. Tom 23:17, October 28, 2011 (UTC) :Sorry, I did not knew that. It's been about 5 or 6 years since I've last seen that episode. However, here on MA, Shepherd was credited to play Morn in "Looking for...", so I based my info on that. Thanks for the correction. -- Ltarex 11:30, October 29, 2011 (CET) Unnamed lists Please note that when you change numbers and headers on various unnamed lists, you are also breaking a large number of incoming links, especially from the images used, actors or actresses, and above all, the episode pages. Please take the care to fix these incoming links if you feel a need to change the headers (especially the numbers!). Thanks. -- sulfur 16:21, November 14, 2011 (UTC) :Sorry, but I don't really understand this. English is not my first language and I'm also not a computer expert. Sorry. -- Ltarex 17:44, November 14, 2011 (CET) When you add a few new unnamed persons and put them as the first Nurses (for example) and then renumber all of the other "Nurse" entries, you break every incoming reference to "Nurse #2", as the old "Nurse #2" is now "Nurse #5". So, in that case, it was the article for the actress, the image on the page, and the episode page that linked there. Your casual changing of the section titles is breaking a lot of references around the site. So, please be careful when you start changing things like that. Very careful. -- sulfur 17:13, November 14, 2011 (UTC) Paramount lks Please don't link things directly to "Paramount". That isn't an article. Use "Paramount Pictures" (since that's what the company has long since morphed into) for your links instead. Thanks. -- sulfur 18:56, December 23, 2011 (UTC) Filming days I appreciate the changes you've made about the filming days of the TNG episodes. What are your sources? I ask because I've just noticed an error and will correct it when I am finished watching and . Tom 19:09, December 27, 2011 (UTC) :Correct it whenever you wish. I just tried to help you with you're work. Most of my sources are the same as yours, call sheets or filming schedules, but unfortunately I have a limited number of those, so many times I have to use sheer logic connecting the days. Since you've listed a day of filming on 18 September for "Unification II", I thought it went over schedule a half day (or was scheduled for seven and half days from the start) and in the remainder of the day they began filming "Unification I". Sorry, if that's not correct, surely, correct it. Thanks. On the other hand, I added many filming dates based on your background information regarding a number of episodes. Thanks for that. -- Ltarex 20:31, December 27, 2011 (UTC) ::No problem at all. As I said I appreciate your edits and help. The problem with some filming days is simple: Some episodes are filmed seven days, some eight, and some only six. And then are some days off filming (Labor days, company holiday). I wish it would be simple to add seven days of filming to every episode. Tom 19:47, December 27, 2011 (UTC) The Savage Curtain (episode) Further to my reply (on my talk page) thanking you for your corrections, I have massaged your English a little. A point I thought to add in the final paragraph, after your note on how real Lincoln and Surak seemed, is Spock's reply that the reality was a given because the images were created from their own minds. I do not know whether this is an ad-lib by Blish, and tried to view the episode on-line, using the link in the article. But CBS now offers only 20 episodes, and this is not one of them. Spike-from-NH 14:54, December 30, 2011 (UTC) :Hi. Here you can find the transcripts of all TOS episodes, so you can work from here. I used to check out this site if I need verification on some spoken information from the series. By the way, English is not my first language, so I used to make mistakes here and there. -- Ltarex 18:01, December 30, 2011 (UTC) What a find! I will enjoy reading those transcripts. I don't feel so bad about post-editing you. Here is a free lesson, on your final sentence: "used to" meaning "accustomed to" is the idiom you wanted, but it is used in a different way: "I am used to mak''ing''". What you have written, by comparison, is the imperfect tense that suggests you don't make mistakes any more, as you used to. Cheers! Spike-from-NH 18:54, December 30, 2011 (UTC) Agony Booth The first comment you excerpted from agonybooth.com on And the Children Shall Lead (episode), on the shallowness of the script, makes a good point. (A separate aspect of the script that annoyed me is the part where, when a character's evil becomes evident, he also becomes pimply-faced.) But I read the entire review by "Albert" and it sheds little light on the program but only on Albert's eagerness to cut things down for the fun of it. On the other parts you excerpt: the review of Marvin Chomsky's career also seems to prove nothing except how clever "Albert" thinks he is. The mention of William Shatner's exaggerated acting is true, but too notoriously well-known to be worth mentioning. It leaves me wondering whether agonybooth.com is the most representative measure of fan reception to be the only one we quote. Spike-from-NH 18:24, December 31, 2011 (UTC) :I enjoy their reviews, and they are certainly Star Trek fans, they even named their site after . If you know any other sources for criticism, praise or any other comment by movie critics, people involved in Trek, etc., feel free to add it. I'd like to improve the TOS episode articles as much as possible. I'm off now. Happy New Year! -- Ltarex 19:30, December 31, 2011 Sorry, am not an expert on Star Trek episodes or their reviewers, just a copy editor who likes TOS. (As a US Supreme Court judge once famously said of pornography: "I can't define it but I know it when I see it.") All I'm saying is that your last two excerpts from that reviewer weren't as notable as the first. And as I note on my talk page, I've done everything here that seemed urgent, though with your link to the episode transcripts, I saw that our summary of The Cage (episode) omitted important points from the script: Pike's opinion on "women on the bridge" compared to encountering the same women as potential breeding stock; the fact that the Talosians didn't beam them down but extracted them from a rescue party; the fact that they were the source of the excess lasers in the cage; and Pike's marvelous deduction that the failure of the lasers was an illusion. If you know of other summaries that need to follow the script more closely, you may direct me there. Spike-from-NH 23:20, January 1, 2012 (UTC) PS--Having visited your user page: As a fellow originalist, I recommend to you the foreign sport of baseball; and as a connoisseur of women, I recommend that Yeoman Colt has "no brick out of place." Spike-from-NH 21:17, January 2, 2012 (UTC)